[lkml]   [2003]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Re: today's futex changes
In message <Pine.LNX.4.44.0309081746180.7008-100000@localhost.localdomain> you write:
> Most of it (the futex_wait tweaks) looked fine to me -
> though I look forward to the first report of that BUG().

Me too. But at least we'll *get* a report if someone does spurious

> Part 2, requiring VM_WRITE and removing the comment on VM_MAYSHARE,
> seems a regression to me. Perhaps I misinterpreted Linus' action in
> taking Jamie's patch: I took that to mean he relented a little on his
> hardline position about VM_SHARED, and now accepts that in this context
> VM_MAYSHARE is more appropriate (easier to document). I know I argued
> that readonly futices are pointless, but I thought Jamie gave a good
> picture of how a readonly view could still be used. I'd rather that
> part were a separate patch, so Linus can merge or not as he wishes.

Sure, I jumboed them together for feedback from you guys.

All users I am currently aware of won't care either way. Current
test-5 is:

Sees Changes Sees FUTEX_WAKE
from another MAP_SHARED from another MAP_SHARED

MAP_PRIVATE read-only: Y N
MAP_PRIVATE read-write: Y* N
MAP_SHARED read-only: Y Y
MAP_SHARED read-write: Y Y

[* Only until page is written to, after which COW splits them ]

Previously, the FUTEX_WAKE column was identical to the first column.
Now, IMHO, this new semantic is more sensible, but I don't really

But I don't recall anything about believable use of RO futexes: Jamie?

Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:48    [W:0.091 / U:6.576 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site